They say the only two things that are certain in life are death and taxes. President Barack Obama wants to add one more: voting.

Obama floated the idea of mandatory voting in the U.S. while speaking to a civic group in Cleveland on Wednesday. Asked about the influence of money in U.S. elections, Obama digressed into the topic of voting rights and said the U.S. should be making it easier for people to vote.

Just ask Australia, where citizens have no choice but to vote, the president said.

“If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country,” Obama said, calling it “potentially transformative.” Not only that, Obama said, but universal voting would “counteract money more than anything.”

Disproportionately, Americans who skip the polls on Election Day are younger, lower-income and more likely to be immigrants or minorities, Obama said. “There’s a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls,” he said in a veiled reference to voter identification laws in a number of states.

Less than 37 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in the 2014 midterms, according to the United States Election Project. And a Pew Research Center study found that those avoiding the polls in 2014 tended to be younger, poorer, less educated and more racially diverse.

Back in September of 2013, economist.com posted an article titled, “Where is it Compulsory to Vote?”. In that article, you will find the following summary…

…in some countries skipping the polling booth can land you in trouble. In Australia non-voters can expect a letter from the electoral commission demanding an explanation for their absenteeism. If they don’t have a good excuse they are fined A$20 ($19). If they fail to pay they can end up in court, where the fine is upped to A$170, plus court fees. Refuse to cough up and they face jail. A survey by Britain’s electoral commission in 2006 categorised three other countries as having “very strict” compulsory-voting regimes. In Brazil and Peru, non-voters are banned from carrying out various administrative transactions (Brazilians cannot apply for passports or sit professional exams, in theory at least), as well as facing small fines. In Singapore, non-voters have their names removed from the electoral roll—which many of them are presumably not too worried by. A host of other countries have varyingly strict rules on voting, along with some curious get-outs. Illiterate people are excused in Brazil and Ecuador; soldiers are excluded in Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala and Lebanon. The elderly are off the hook in several countries. And in Bolivia, where voting is notionally compulsory, married people are enfranchised from the age of 18, whereas singletons must wait until they are 21.

Proponents of mandatory voting argue that democracy is too important to be optional. Others say that compulsory self-determination is something of a contradiction in terms. There are economic arguments on both sides: compulsory voting saves money in campaigns, because parties otherwise splurge vast amounts on “getting out the vote”. On the other hand, enforcing the law clogs up courts and keeps bureaucrats busy, at substantial cost. The electoral consequences of mandatory voting are disputed. Some wonder if introducing compulsory voting in America would favour the Democrats, for instance, just as making it harder to vote seems to make life easier for Republicans. Others suspect that more votes would accrue to the party in power—or simply the candidate whose name appears at the top of the ballot.

And, there lies the rub.

Obama was most definitely floating a trial balloon when he suggested the fascist idea of compulsory voting.

By wrapping the American Flag around this freedom-constricting notion, Obama was covering up the fact that he mistakenly believes that he could fool Americans into backing this current scheme to grab some more voters for the Democratic Party.

Of course, this is nothing new for the Democrats.

I remember, as a college kid of 21, back in 1980, feeling my jaw drop as I read about Rep. Harold Ford, Sr.’s (D, Memphis) Campaign Staff actually busing people to the polls. And, not just people living in the district, additionally, Ford would send the busses to Nursing Homes as well, with staffers to help the “poor and unfortunate” to pull the right lever in the voting booth.

If Obama were to sign an Executive Order and compulsory voting were to become the law of the land, you would see shenanigans like those I just mentioned, from coast to coast, and in every tiny hamlet in between.

After the nursing homes , the Democratic Buses would probably stop at the cemeteries.

Our Founding Fathers fought hard to give us the gift of Liberty.

However, the thing about Liberty is that it is Freedom with Responsibility…Responsibility to obey our nation’s laws, Responsibility to take care of our families, Responsibility to protect our Liberty, and the Responsibility to fulfill our Civic Duty and vote.

I have been voting since 1980, when I used my first vote to help Ronald Wilson Reagan win the Presidency of the United States.

After six years of testy relations, US President Barack Obama may have to resign himself to the likelihood that he has not seen the last of Benjamin Netanyahu.

A better-than-expected showing by the Israeli prime minister in Tuesday’s closely fought election raises the prospect that he could remain a thorn in Obama’s side, with the two men increasingly at odds over Iran diplomacy and Middle East peacemaking.

US officials responded cautiously as they waited to see whether Netanyahu or his center-left challenger, Isaac Herzog, would get the nod from Israel’s president to begin the long and messy coalition-building process.

Clearly the result that many of Obama’s supporters had hoped for – a repudiation by Israeli voters of Netanyahu’s hard-line approach – was not to be. Exit polls showed that his Likud party had erased its rival’s pre-election lead, putting the two sides in a dead heat.

“Looks like the White House will need to let the champagne chill a bit longer,” Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations, tweeted about the election outcome.

The election came just two weeks after Netanyahu defied Obama with a politically divisive speech to Congress attacking US-led nuclear talks with Iran. The final days of campaigning only served to deepen tensions between the right-wing leader and Washington.

Even as they insisted publicly on non-intervention in the Israeli campaign, Obama’s aides were taken aback by Netanyahu’s reversal of his previous declaration of support for creating a Palestinian state, a longstanding cornerstone of US policy.

Netanyahu also drew a rebuke from the US State Department for suggesting on election day that left-wingers were trying to get Arab-Israeli voters out “in droves” to sway the election against him.

“Netanyahu has managed an uphill climb in the last few days,” said David Makovsky, a former member of Obama’s team in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks that collapsed last year.

“The way he has survived was to cannibalize part of the right and also adopt policy positions that are bound to create further friction with Washington,” said Makovsky, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “He’s going to be in the next government one way or another.”

Netanyahu could have the easier path to forming a cabinet, which would put him on course to becoming Israel’s longest serving leader.

That prospect may not bode well for repairing US-Israeli ties after Netanyahu’s congressional speech, which he delivered at the invitation of Obama’s Republican opponents despite strong objections from the president and many of Obama’s fellow Democrats.

US officials had left little doubt of their hope for an election outcome that would create a new ruling coalition more in sync with – or at least less hostile to – Obama’s agenda, especially with an end-of-March deadline looming for a framework nuclear deal in negotiations between Tehran and world powers.

As a prime minister, Zionist Union leader Herzog would be expected to take an Obama-friendlier course less confrontational over Iran and more open to renewed peacemaking with the Palestinians.

It would also be a chance to get past six years of slights, mutual suspicion and even antipathy at the top of the US-Israeli relationship and return to traditional bipartisanship in Congress on the issue of Israeli security.

That will not be easy if Netanyahu remains in office – though some analysts suggest that tensions with Obama could be eased along with the threat of international isolation if the rivals decide to form a broad-based national unity government.

Efforts already were under way in Washington to lower the temperature.

“What we’re focused on is the Israelis moving forward, forming a government and we will work with whoever is prime minister to see if we can make progress in what is a very tough and difficult area to do so,” she said.

Nancy Pelosi, the House of Representatives Democratic minority leader, said that as someone who loves Israel, she was “near tears” during Netanyahu’s March 3 address, calling his remarks an “insult to the intelligence of the United States.”

But on Tuesday, she said the US-Israeli relationship would stay strong, whoever won, and declined to weigh in before the result on whether Netanyahu’s speech hurt him.

“It’s a very, very … intellectual relationship, security relationship and an emotional one as well,” she told reporters.

Underscoring the partisan divide over Netanyahu, Republican US Senator Ted Cruz said: “His electoral success is all the more impressive given the powerful forces that tried to undermine him, including, sadly, the full weight of the Obama political team.”

What may have have been a harbinger of the opposition party’s was actually a prophetic poll from January of 2014 which showed that most Israelis trusted “The Leader of the Free World” about as far as they could throw Moochelle.

According to new poll, a huge majority of Israelis do not trust President Obama with regard to Iran, and believe Obama will allow Iran to go nuclear. Only 22 percent of Israeli voters believed that Obama would “ensure that Iran does not achieve a nuclear weapon.”

Almost two-thirds of Israelis thought that statement was untrue, and 15 percent gave no answer. President Obama has just a 33 percent favorable rating in Israel, as opposed to a 50 percent disapproval rating. Even those who favor Obama are split evenly on whether or not he will prevent Iran from going nuclear.

After over a year of Petulant President Pantywaist pussy-footing around with the Mad Mullahs of Iran, it is a certainty that those numbers in that poll would be even more skewed today against Barack Hussein Obama.

And, rightfully so.

Barack Hussein Obama, despite his protestations to the contrary, is not a friend of Israel.

In fact, the entirety of Obama’s Foreign Policy Efforts, over both terms, have been nothing but a series of back-handed insults to God’s Chosen People.

From his meeting with Hamas before he was even elected, to his unwavering insistence that Israelis give up half of their country to the Middle Eastern Gypsies, know as Palestinians, “citizens” of a country that never existed, except as a vaguely-defined British Territory, eons ago, the first anti-American President has thumbed his nose at the country of Israel.

From his unwavering support of “Arab Spring” to his entertaining the barbaric Muslim Brotherhood repeatedly in OUR White House, Obama has embraced our sworn enemies and alienated our staunchest ally.

From their birth as a Nation in 1948, Israel and the United States of America have been united against the forces of Radical Islam.

…That is, until Barack Hussein Obama took office, and he and his Administration decided that Muslim Terrorist Acts were just “man-caused disasters”.

Obama has intentionally derided and snubbed Prime Minister Netanyahu over the years, once, even leaving a serious discussion with him, to go have dinner with Mooch and the girls, because Bibi was schooling him, as usually happened, every time they met.

And, of course, who can forget the hissy fit which Obama and all of his Liberal sycophants threw over Netanyahu speaking to Congress about the Iranian Situation, at the request of Speaker John Boehner.

And, now, with Congress beginning the process of investigating whether the president used OUR money in an attempt to have Prime Minister Netanyahu voted out of office, Bibi has once again made Obama look like the petulant dhimmi wuss that he is, by being re-elected.

Faced with a tight race for his political life, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stepped up the nationalist rhetoric on the eve of parliamentary elections, vowing a Palestinian state will not be established on his watch if he’s re-elected.

In an interview published Monday in the nrg news website, Netahyahu said withdrawing from occupied areas to make way for a Palestinian state would only ensure that territory will be taken over by Islamic extremists. When asked if that means a Palestinian state will not be established if he is elected, Netanyahu said “indeed.”

It was the latest — and clearest — attempt by Netanyahu to disavow his earlier support for Palestinian independence, which he first laid out in a landmark 2009 speech.

“If we get this guarantee for demilitarization and necessary security arrangements for Israel, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, we will be willing in a real peace agreement to reach a solution of a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state,” he said in 2009.

Despite that pledge, two rounds of peace talks have failed and Netanyahu has continued to expand Jewish settlements.

In a further attempt to appeal to hard-line voters, the Israeli leader also vowed Monday to strengthen construction in east Jerusalem settlements. Netanyahu tried to shore up support on several campaign stops after the latest polls showed his Likud party trailing behind the centrist Zionist party, the day before Tuesday’s Knesset elections.

Netanyahu is in a close race against the Center-Left Zionist Union party led by Tzipi Livni and Isaac Herzog, who confidently predicted an “upheaval” was imminent.

In recent days, Netanyahu has been on a get-out-the-vote blitz, saying a dovish government would spell disaster for the country and complaining of an international conspiracy to oust him. But Monday’s comments will put him further at odds with the international community, boding poorly for already strained relations with the U.S. and other key allies if he wins a third consecutive term.

There was no immediate comment from U.S. officials.

The international community overwhelmingly supports the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, areas captured by Israel in 1967, and opposes settlement construction. Netanyahu’s tough new position is likely to worsen his already strained ties with his western allies if he is re-elected.

Netanyahu has portrayed himself as the only politician capable of confronting Israel’s numerous security challenges, while his opponents have focused on the country’s high cost of living and presented Netanyahu as imperious and out of touch with the common man.

Netanyahu has also complained of an international conspiracy to oust him, funded by wealthy foreigners who dislike him, and on Sunday night, he addressed an outdoor rally before tens of thousands of hard-line supporters in Tel Aviv.

However, V15’s complete takeover of OneVoice’s Tel Aviv offices may raise some questions not only about the grant usage but about the State Department’s current partnership with OneVoice.

Aside from the State Department, OneVoice is also openly partnered with Google, the U.K. Labour Party and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

The conservative blogosphere is largely focusing on the involvement of Bird in the V15 campaign.

A closer look at Bird’s consulting firm as well as its working relationship with the Israeli groups finds he is just one of scores of former senior Obama election campaign staffers now working on the anti-Netanyahu effort.

Besides Bird, the 270 Strategies team includes the following former Obama staffers:Mitch Steward, a 270 Strategies founding partner who helped the Obama campaign build what the U.K. Guardian called “a historic ground operation that will provide the model for political campaigns in America and around the world for years to come.”

Mark Beatty, a founding partner who served as deputy battleground states director for the Obama campaign. He had primary responsibility for Obama’s election plans for the battleground states.

Marlon Marshall, a founding partner at 270 Strategies who joins the team after holding several key positions in national Democratic politics, most recently as deputy national field director for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Betsy Hoover, a founding partner who served as director of digital organizing on the Obama campaign.

Meg Ansara, who served as national regional director for Obama for America where she was responsible for overseeing the 2012 programs in the Midwest and southern states.

Bridget Halligan, who served as the engagement program manager on the digital team of the 2012 Obama campaign.

Kate Catherall, who served as Florida deputy field director for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Alex Lofton, who most recently served as the GOTV director of Cleveland, Ohio, for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Martha Patzer, the firm’s vice president who served as deputy email director at Obama for America.

Jesse Boateng, who served as the Florida voter registration director for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Ashley Bryant, who served most recently as the Ohio digital director for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Max Clermont, who formerly served as a regional field director in Florida for Obama’s re-election campaign.

Max Wood, who served as a deputy data director in Florida for the 2012 Obama campaign.

Now, I’m no Pollyanna.

(Although my bride does accuse me of always seeing the best in everyone. but, I digress…)

I know that America has influenced other nations’ elections for years, covertly, usually through the influence of backdoor diplomatic channels and the CIA.

However, Petulant President Pantywaist, who is desperately sucking up to the Rogue, Muslim Terrorist Nation of Iran, who would rather kill us infidels than look at us, blatantly worked overtly to kick out of office, the Prime Minister of one of our closest allies.

Obama’s petulance knows no bounds.

Every time they have met, Netanyahu has schooled Obama, making him look like the petulant little lightweight that he is.

In order for Obama to succeed in his plan for a nuclear Iran, he must rid himself of Netanyahu’s strong and forthright leadership.

Obama believes, and rightfully so, that by replacing Netanyahu with a Liberal Politician in Israel, then the “Arab Spring”, which began under his presidency, will reach its apocalyptic zenith, with a nuclear Iran and an Israel cleaved in half, like Solomon almost did that baby, in order to make room for the fictional “country of Palestine”.

For some clearly insane reason, Obama views this creation of a Caliphate as his Foreign Policy Legacy.

There is a reason that I will always refer to him as “our first anti-American President”.

Number 1…I wasn’t raised that way. Number 2…when I tried to get by with it as a kid, my mother whupped me (Southern colloquialism for “delivered disciplinary punishment”) on the back of my legs with a yardstick. I swear, to this day, the back of my legs read 4…5…6…

However, the President of the United States does not have that problem.

Most voters believe the United States is the best country in the world. Far fewer of them believe Barack Obama agrees, according to a Fox News poll released Thursday.

The new poll also finds the numbers saying Obama is patriotic, honest or a strong leader have all declined in the past few years.

More Americans feel they love the United States than think Obama does: 83 percent think the U.S. is the greatest country in the world. Just 64 percent believe Obama feels the same way.

The difference in the two perceptions is mainly partisan: 90 percent of Republicans think the U.S. is the best, while only 42 percent believe the president agrees. Among Democrats, 82 percent feel this is the greatest nation, and even more — 88 percent — believe Obama feels that.

Those who are most likely to feel the U.S. is the best nation in the world include voters over age 65 (93 percent) as well as Republicans (90 percent). Those least likely to feel that way include voters who identify with the Tea Party movement (79 percent), self-identified independents (73 percent) and voters under age 35 (71 percent).

Overall, 54 percent of voters say Obama is patriotic, yet that’s down from 60 percent who felt that way in 2011. Again, party identification matters: the number of Republicans today who think the president is patriotic is down six percentage points from 2011, among independents it’s down four points and for Democrats it’s down one.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani caused an uproar in February by questioning whether Barack Obama loves America. The poll shows 42 percent of voters nationally think there are “legitimate reasons to doubt” whether Obama loves America. That includes 66 percent of Republicans, 42 percent of independents and 17 percent of Democrats.

Fewer voters than ever before see Obama as honest: a record-low 43 percent. And for the first time since 2007, a majority, 54 percent, disagrees that the president is “honest.”

Three-quarters of Democrats currently think Obama is honest (75 percent), while just 39 percent of independents and 15 percent of Republicans say the same.

For comparison, in 2011 some 57 percent of voters described Obama as honest. That included 86 percent of Democrats, 53 percent of independents and 26 percent of Republicans.

The poll also finds 43 percent of voters think Obama is a “strong leader.” That’s down from a high of 60 percent who said he was a “strong and decisive” leader in 2009.

Of the four traits tested, Obama does best on “caring,” as 60 percent of voters feel that describes him. Although there’s been a decline here too: 68 percent said Obama was “caring” in 2011.

The Fox News poll is conducted by telephone with live interviewers under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). The 1,011 registered voters were reached via landline and cell phone numbers randomly selected for inclusion in this nationwide survey from March 1-3, 2015. The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Americans have noticed that there is a great disconnect between the citizens of the United States and their president. It’s not just his stand-offish behavior. There’s something else going on. He was not raised like the majority of Americans.

He didn’t have rubber dart gun wars in the neighborhood backyards. He didn’t play Nerf football in the front yards. He didn’t go to Vacation Bible School. I don’t know if he was ever told to stand with his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.

It is this disconnect that is at the heart of the trouble with Obama’s presidency. Hope and Change have turned into despair and disbelief. Obama has never understood the shared values of average Americans, because the people who raised him did not share those values, either. It is the concern that we feel for one another, that shared American value system, that is causing a great awakening. One of the main reasons Obama wants control of the internet is so we can’t communicate with each other and he can control the message.

His obvious affinity for and trust of the Radical Followers of Mohammed is another reason that he has earned Americans’ distrust.

Have you ever wondered why they have kept the president’s early days of childhood and growing up so secretive?

If you will read what has gotten out to the public, you will understand. He wasn’t raised like you and me. His mother, shall we politely say, was a free spirit. After young Mr. Obama’s dad ran away, his mom married a fellow by the last name of Soetoro, who took them home with him to Indonesia, where young Barry attended a Muslim school for wealthy citizens’ children.

While at the Madrassa, Barry learned a great many things, including the Muslim practice of Taqiyya.

The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking.

It is currently employed in fending off and neutralizing any criticism of Islam or Muslims.

To summarize, in approximately 240 years of existence, the United States of America has gone from having a president who could not tell a lie to having a president who cannot tell the truth.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in his address to Congress that there would be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East if a deal is signed with Iran.

“We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation, and terror,” Netanyahu said to applause.

In a speech that dozens of Democrats skipped, the Israeli leader warned that a nuclear deal “paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”

“So you see my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one leaving Iran with a vast nuclear progam, and two, lifiting the restrictions on that program in about a decade,” Netanyahu said. “That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb, it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”

The Israeli prime minister touched on the major concessions he believes will happen in a nuclear deal with Iran.

“Absent to dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran: the first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short breakout time to the bomb. Breakout time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb,” Netanyahu said. According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected but not destroyed. Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largly intact, Iran’s breakout time would be very short — about a year by America’s assessment, even shorter by Israel.”

Calling it a “very bad deal,” Netanyahu said that Iran will always be an enemy to the U.S.

“The ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America. And don’t be fooled, the battle between Iran an ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America,” he said. “Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic, the other calls itself the Islamic State, both want to impose a militant Islamic empire — first on the region and then on the entire world.”

Netanyahu believes the deal could lead to a “potential nuclear nightmare.”

“If anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a MIddle East littered with nuclear bombs, and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare,” he said.

Netanyahu also touched on Iran defying United Nations inspectors.

“I know this won’t come as a shock to many of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, but it also plays a pretty good game of ‘hide and cheat’ with them,” he said.

Netanyahu said that Israel is no longer passive in the face of threats to its country and people.

“I can guarantee you this: The days when the Jewish people remain passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over,” he told lawmakers. “We are no longer scattered among the nations powerless to defend ourselves, we restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend ourselves have boundless courage. For the first time in a hundred generations, we the Jewish people can defend ourselves.

“Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

Netanyahu added that Iran’s founding document calls for the “pursuit of jihad.”

During his speech, Netanyahu stated that he deeply regretted that some perceived him being in Washington as political.

“We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel,” Netanyahu said. “I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.”

Netanyahu thanked Congress for their support to build Israel’s “Iron Dome.”

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, opened up his program yesterday, with the following on-point observations…

Nothing focuses the mind and heart like moral, ethical, and legal clarity. And today in the House of Representatives chamber at the United States Capitol, the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, gave an historically important speech. A speech that any previous American president could have and maybe would have made, a speech to rally and save Western civilization.

We are talking about thwarting a plan that gives the world’s leading terrorist state, we’re talking about thwarting a plan being brokered by our administration that gives Iran a certain path to produce nuclear weapons. Iran, the world’s leading exporter of terrorism, the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East. And Benjamin Netanyahu came to the United States today in a desperate plea for the world to focus, to get serious, and take notice of what is happening. It was stunning. I don’t know how many of you in the audience here had a chance to see it. We will have audio sound bites of it coming. We’re still putting those together now. But I’m gonna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, it was powerful, and the Drive-By Media is underselling this. As I watched the post-speech commentary on the cable news networks, never has it been more clear that the world in which they live is not the world in which we live. To them it’s just another hum-ho speech that happened to be delivered by a foreign leader.

They’re all engaged in post-speech analysis as they would engage in the post-speech analysis of anybody who happened to give a speech about anything. They’re looking at it through the political prism of how does it help or hurt Obama? How does it help or hurt the Democrat Party, and what is Obama going to do? Will this hurt the Democrats who boycotted this speech?

They are missing the full impact and importance of what this speech was. So we will try during the program today to tell you what that was, explain to you the importance of this speech. The optics of this speech were just so overwhelmingly powerful. When I say “what could have been,” this was leadership. This was leadership in full force.

Benjamin Netanyahu today was everything Barack Obama is not. Everything. This speech today even featured Netanyahu turning to a guest in the gallery, much like presidents who deliver State of the Union speeches. Netanyahu’s guest, Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor. This speech, as I say, historically important, moral, ethical, and legal clarity. Nothing like that combination to focus the mind. And this speech was all about rallying and saving Western civilization, which is what is under assault.

There was a time, not too long ago, when the President of the United States would have taken it upon his shoulders to lead the charge to “save Western Civilization” Now, it has fallen upon the broad shoulders of the Prime Minister of Israel, one of our staunchest allies, to “save Western Civilization” from the failed, amateurish Foreign Policy efforts of the President of the United States of America.

What is wrong with this picture?!!!

That “singular moment in history” yesterday was not just mind-blowing…it was embarrassing.

It was embarrassing that somehow a morally, spiritually, and diplomatically challenged, un-vetted lightweight of a Collegiate Guest Lecturer, like Barack Hussein Obama, was allowed to be elected President of the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth and to be thrust into the position of “Leader of the Free World” and “Guardian of Western Civilization”.

I was listening to Fox News on Sirius XM 114 in my car yesterday, while Obama was reacting to Netanyahu’s speech. The petulance and barely-hidden vitriol coming out of the President’s mouth made me want to stop my car, get out of it, and hurl.

Petulant President Pantywaist sounded like a 12 year old, just back for getting spanked in the Principal’s Office, trying to convince his school buddies that “it didn’t hurt”, when, in fact, his behind was as red as Rudolph’s nose.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

Wednesday night, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stepped in with a critical letter to the bureau demanding it explain the surprise and abrupt bullet ban. The letter is shown below.

The National Rifle Association, which is working with Goodlatte to gather co-signers, told Secrets that 30 House members have already co-signed the letter and Goodlatte and the NRA are hoping to get a total of 100 fast.

“The Obama administration was unable to ban America’s most popular sporting rifle through the legislative process, so now it’s trying to ban commonly owned and used ammunition through regulation,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA, the group’s policy and lobby shop. “The NRA and our tens of millions of supporters across the country will fight to stop President Obama’s latest attack on our Second Amendment freedoms.”

At issue is so-called “armor-piercing” ammunition, an exemption for those bullets mostly used for sport by AR-15 owners, and the recent popularity of pistol-style ARs that use the ammo.

The inexpensive 5.56 M885 ammo, commonly called green tips, have been exempt for years, as have higher-caliber ammunition that also easily pierces the type of soft armor worn by police, because it’s mostly used by target shooters, not criminals. The agency proposes to reclassify it as armor-piercing and not exempt.

But now BATFE says that since the bullets can be used in semi-automatic handguns they pose a threat to police and must be banned from production, sale and use. But, as Goodlatte noted, the agency offered no proof. Federal agencies will still be allowed to buy the ammo.

“This round is amongst the most commonly used in the most popular rifle design in America, the AR-15. Millions upon millions of M855 rounds have been sold and used in the U.S., yet ATF has not even alleged — much less offered evidence — that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer,” said Goodlatte’s letter.

Even some police don’t buy the administration’s claim. “Criminals aren’t going to go out and buy a $1,000 AR pistol,” Brent Ball, owner of 417 Guns in Springfield, Mo., and a 17-year veteran police officer told the Springfield News-Leader. “As a police officer I’m not worried about AR pistols because you can see them. It’s the small gun in a guy’s hand you can’t see that kills you.”

Many see the bullet ban as an assault on the AR-15 and Obama’s back-door bid to end production and sale.

“We are concerned,” said Justin Anderson with Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation’s top sellers of AR-15 style rifles. “Frankly, we’re always concerned when the government uses back-door methods to impose quasi-gun control.”

Groups like the National Shooting Sports Foundation suggest that under BATFE’s new rule, other calibers like popular deer hunting .308 bullets could be banned because they also are used in AR platforms, some of which can be turned into pistol-style guns. “This will have a detrimental effect on hunting nationwide,” said the group.

One man with a gun can control 100 without one. – Vladimir Lenin

The laws in this country are written in Congress. That would be the Senate and the House. The president does not write laws. The president does not make law.

Well, he’s not supposed to.

Judges are not supposed to make laws. Judges are not supposed to create laws. That’s only supposed to happen in Congress. When Congress refuses to vote for a law, then it’s dead.

What the president is admitting here is that he can’t legally enact the gun laws that he and his minions would prefer.

So he is just going to do it unilaterally with Executive Orders.

Now, I’m not lying to you when I tell you that is not what Executive Orders permit. It’s not why they were created; it’s not what they’re for. Executive Orders do not grant dictatorial power to presidents. They do not grant the power to the president to violate existing law. Executive Orders do not grant the power to the president to write new law. The president and his team will be in violation of the Constitution if they do this. Now, there are certain things that can be done with Executive Orders, but they can’t write new law. But if nobody stops them, what’s the point?

They can get away with it.

There’s always a way to get away with it.

Obama is trying to achieve his Marxist dream of taking away guns from law-abiding citizens through the issuing of Executive Orders.

However, this is not Russia, during the Bolshevik Revolution. This is America, where we have a System of Checks and Balances.

Please urge your Senator and Representative to put all the pressure they can on their Democratic colleagues to stop the president from turning us into an unarmed citizenry, vulnerable to enemies, foreign and domestic….and political, too.

Obama’s actions, as I have written before, remind me of a spoiled child who, when told “NO!” by his parents, launches into a screeching, whining temper tantrum.

Just like an unruly child, it’s time for Obama to be disciplined…by turning him into a lame duck for the remainder of his presidency.

Obama is not a leader. He is a petulant, pedantic Graduate Assistant, playing at being a tenured professor.

Do you remember when you were a child, and your parents told you to pick your friends carefully because you are judged by the company that you keep?

Evidently, Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. never took young Barry aside and gave him that bit of advice.

Look at Barack Hussein Obama’s career, from his days as a community organizer to now, and look at the company he kept and is keeping.

Back in his days of community organizing, Obama hung out with the movers and shakers of Chicago politics, professional politicians who are known for their shady backroom dealing.

Then, he worked at the Annenberg Foundation with Former Weatherman, Bomber Bill Ayers

When he got into the Illinois Senate, he continued these relationships, and built new ones with fellow travelers. That is, politicians who thought the same way that he did and who never saw a situation that they could not take advantage of.

Then, when he came to the United States Senate, he and his handlers made sure that he was around the right sort of people who could further his political career. Of course, this took the seat of importance away from those whom he was supposed to be representing from his home district.

After his election to the highest office in this land, Obama has made poor choice after poor choice , in terms of whom to embrace as a friend among four and leadership, and whom to alienate.

As I have said many times, Obama alienates our friends and embraces our enemies.

There is a reason that the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, always advised to

Trust, but verify.

Reagan knew that in the game of world politics, those who wish to harm us, are masters at being duplicitous.

Our enemies will lie to us at every opportunity to gain an advantage over us, because they fear the kind of American Will and Courage, which freed the world in World War II.

Ronaldus Magnus’ warning continues to echo as loud as it ever did, some 30+ years later.

However, the individual who now sits behind the desk in the Oval Office, refuses to verify the intentions of those whom he remains so steadfast in attempting to befriend.

Edging toward a historic compromise, the U.S. and Iran reported progress Monday on a deal that would clamp down on Tehran’s nuclear activities for at least 10 years but then slowly ease restrictions on programs that could be used to make atomic arms.

Officials said there were still obstacles to overcome before a March 31 deadline, and any deal will face harsh opposition in both countries. It also would be sure to further strain already-tense U.S. relations with Israel, whose leaders oppose any agreement that doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to strongly criticize the deal in an address before Congress next week.

Still, a comprehensive pact could ease 35 years of U.S-Iranian enmity — and seems within reach for the first time in more than a decade of negotiations.

“We made progress,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said as he bade farewell to members of the American delegation at the table with Iran. More discussions between Iran and the six nations engaging it were set for next Monday, a senior U.S. official said.

Western officials familiar with the talks cited movement but also described the discussions as a moving target, meaning changes in any one area would have repercussions for other parts of the negotiation.

The core idea would be to reward Iran for good behavior over the last years of any agreement, gradually lifting constraints on its uranium enrichment and slowly easing economic sanctions.

Iran says it does not want nuclear arms and needs enrichment only for energy, medical and scientific purposes, but the U.S. fears Tehran could re-engineer the program to produce the fissile core of a nuclear weapon.

The U.S. initially sought restrictions lasting up to 20 years; Iran has pushed for less than a decade. The prospective deal appears to be somewhere in the middle.

One variation being discussed would place at least a 10-year regime of strict controls on Iran’s uranium enrichment. If Iran complied, the restrictions would be gradually lifted over the final five years.

One issue critics are certain to focus on: Once the deal expired, Iran could theoretically ramp up enrichment to whatever level it wanted.

Experts say Iran already could produce the equivalent of one weapon’s worth of enriched uranium with its present operating 10,000 centrifuges. Several officials spoke of 6,500 centrifuges as a potential point of compromise, with the U.S. trying to restrict them to Iran’s mainstay IR-1 model instead of more advanced machines.

However, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said last year that his country needed to increase its output equivalent to at least 190,000 of its present-day centrifuges.

Under a possible agreement, Iran also would be forced to ship out most of the enriched uranium it produced or change it to a form that would be difficult to convert for weapons use. It takes about one ton of low-enriched uranium to process into a nuclear weapon, and officials said that Tehran could be restricted to an enriched stockpile of no more than about 700 pounds.

The officials represent different countries among the six world powers negotiating with Iran — the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly about the negotiations.

Formal relations between the U.S. and Iran, severed during the Iranian revolution and hostage crisis in 1979, have progressively improved since moderate Iranian President Hassan Rouhani took office in 2013. Further reconciliation would help the West in a region where Iran holds considerable sway and the U.S. is increasingly involved in the struggle against Islamic extremists.

But even if the two sides agree to a preliminary deal in March and a follow-up pact in June, such a two-phase arrangement will face fierce criticism from Congress and Israel, both of which will argue it fails to significantly curb Tehran’s nuclear weapons potential.

Israel was already weighing in.

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon warned that such a deal would represent “a great danger” to the Western world and said it “will allow Iran to become a nuclear threshold state.”

In Washington, President Barack Obama has been trying to keep Congress from passing new sanctions against Iran that he says could scuttle further diplomacy and rekindle the threat of a new Mideast war.

Iranian hardliners fearing a sellout of their country’s nuclear program may also pressure Rouhani, although he appears secure as long as a deal is supported by Khamenei.

The U.N’s International Atomic Energy Agency would have responsibility for monitoring, and any deal would depend on technical safeguards rather than Iranian guarantees.

Yeah, right. Good luck with that.

We’re screwed.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naivete or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

We hear lot about the United States’ Judeo-Christian heritage, but according to President Obama, “Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding.”

That’s what the president told a White House conference on “countering violent extremism” on Wednesday.

Obama has said similar things in the past:

“I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story,” Obama said in aJune 2009 speech in Cairo, Egypt. “Islam has always been part of America,” he said in a 2010 statement marking the start of Ramadan. And in a 2014 statement marking Eid, Obama said the holiday “also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.”

In his speech on Wednesday, Obama was making the point that Western nations must show that they “welcome people of all faiths,” at a time when “extremists” are saying that Western nations are “hostile to Muslims.”

“Here in America, Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding. Generations — (applause) — Generations of Muslim immigrants came here and went to work as farmers and merchants and factory workers, helped to lay railroads and to build up America.

“The first Islamic center in New York City was founded in the 1890s. America’s first mosque, this was an interesting fact, was in North Dakota.” (It was established in 1929).

Both of those milestones happened well after America’s founding, however. In fact, the new nation’s first dealings with Islam were tense and unpleasant.

According to a Heritage Foundation paper, shortly after America’s founding, the United States “was dragged into the affairs of the Islamic world by an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim pirates, the terrorists of the era,” who looted American ships and captured American sailors, holding them for ransom or selling them as slaves.

The paper notes that America’s struggle with Muslim pirates from the Barbary States (modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya) began soon after the 13 colonies declared their independence from Britain in 1776 and continued for roughly four decades.

In his remarks on Wednesday, President Obama said Muslim Americans now serve as police officers, firefighters, soldiers, “and in our intelligence communities and in homeland security.”

He said Muslim American heroes are buried at Arlington National Cemetery, “having given their lives in defense of all of us.”

“And, of course, that’s the story extremists and terrorists don’t want the world to know — Muslims succeeding and thriving in America. Because when that truth is known, it exposes their propaganda as the lie that it is.

“It’s also a story that every American must never forget, because it reminds us all that hatred and bigotry and prejudice have no place in our country. It is not just counterproductive. It doesn’t just aid terrorists. It’s wrong. It’s contrary to who we are.”

So-called hate crimes against Muslims escalated in this country after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 — attacks perpetrated by Islamic radicals — but they have never reached the level of hate crimes against Jews, according to the FBI’s annual Uniform Crime Reporting statistics.

In 2013, for example, 62.4 percent of hate crime victims were attacked because of anti-Jewish bias, while 11.6 percent were victims of anti-Islamic bias.

Compare that with the year before the 2001 terror attacks: In 2000, of the 1,699 victims of anti-religious hate crime, 74.6 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-Jewish bias; and only 2.1 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-Islamic bias.

Furthermore…

Noted expert on Radical Islam, Walid Shoebat, has a website titled shoebat.com. On it, you will find the following pertinent information:

Islam, is in fact, a part of America’s founding, but not in the sense that Obama wants to convey to us. Islam did a very good job in deceiving some of our Founding Fathers, and once that deception lost its touch, it compelled the United States to launch its first international war that would ultimately lead to the formation of the United States Marine Corps. This international war was the Barbary Pirate Wars.

Joshua E. London wrote a very detailed on article on the Barbary Pirate Wars and I would like to convey some of the things that he has written.

It has been stated that around 1 million European Christian sailors from France, Spain, Holland, Great Britain, the Americas, and even Iceland, were captured by Muslim pirates in between 1500 and 1800. What happened many times was that the sailors would be stripped of all their belongings, including the clothes on their backs, and forced to go into North Africa where they would be slaves to Muslims.

After the American War of Independence, the Americans lost the protection that Britain was providing for their merchant ships, thus leaving American vessels very vulnerable to Islamic attacks.

In the year 1785, two American merchant ships — the Maria of Boston and the Dauphine of Philadelphia — were captured by Muslim pirates. The United States government, instead of using military force, decided to utilize diplomacy to convince the pirates to release the poor twenty four sailors who were under their hands. Such discussions of peace were proven useless, for from 1785 to 1793, thirteen American ships, and 119 American sailors were seized by Algerian pirates.

When Jefferson and Adams were striving to solve the terrorism coming from the Barbary pirates, they apparently did not understand the religion of their enemies. This is where Islam’s involvement in America’s founding comes to mind: Islam deceived the Founding Fathers, and now Obama wants to deceive us into making the same mistakes they made.

President Obama on Wednesday stressed that U.S. is not at war with Islam:”We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,” he said.

He also said the West and Islam are not in conflict; and that Islam is not incompatible with modern life, although in the same speech he urged other countries to invest in the education of both males and females — “because countries will not be truly successful if half their populations, if their girls and their women, are denied opportunity.”

In a speech to the same summit on Thursday, Obama noted that many Americans don’t personally know a single Muslim, and they form a distorted impression about Islam by what they hear on the news.

And, what they hear coming out of President Barack Hussein Obama’s mouth.

“I do not believe — and I know this is a horrible thing to say — but I do not believe that this President loves America,” Giuliani said of Obama.

“He doesn’t love you. He doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up,” Giuliani added. “To love this country. And with all our faults, we’re the most exceptional country in the world.”

The former mayor attempted to soften his comments Thursday, saying that he was “not questioning (Obama’s) patriotism.”

He’s a patriot, I’m sure,” Giuliani said during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends.” “What I’m saying is, in his rhetoric I very rarely hear the things that I used to hear Ronald Reagan say, the things that I used to hear Bill Clinton say about how much he loves America. I do hear him criticize America much more often than other American Presidents. And when it’s not in the context of an overwhelming number of statements about the exceptionalism of America, it sounds like he’s more of a critic than he is a supporter.”

“You can be a patriotic American and be a critic,” he added, “but then you’re not expressing that kind of love that we’re used to from a President.”

That is putting it mildly, Your Honor.

Ever since Barack Hussein Obama ascended to the Throne of the Regime, he has been relentless in his quest to turn our Sovereign Nation in an 180 degree direction from the path of freedom, through a functioning Constitutional Republic, One Nation Under God, Indivisible, which our Founding Fathers, Christian Men, gave us as our legacy.

His denial of the existence of Radical Islam and his rhetorical embrace of Revisionist History is just the latest chapter in what has been a sorry excuse for a presidency.

Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez told The Daily Caller Friday that he didn’t know that illegal immigrants are eligible for tax refunds — even if they haven’t paid taxes.

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told members of Congress Wednesday that illegal immigrants who did not pay taxes will be able to claim back-refunds once they are issued social security numbers.

“I know nothing of the sort,” Gutierrez snapped at a Daily Caller reporter Friday when asked about Koskinen’s testimony.

“Of course it would be like you to raise that sort of question,” the Democrat continued. “Why don’t you ask the commissioner of the IRS?”

The commissioner, of course, had already been asked about it.

“Under the new program,” Koskinen told members of the House oversight committee Wednesday, “if you get a Social Security number and you work, you’ll be eligible to apply for the Earned Income Tax Credit.”

“You will get an amount depending on your situation,” Koskinen added. “If you are an individual working and applying for the Earned Income Tax Credit, the maximum you can get is in the range of 500 to 600 dollars.”

However, according to the IRS’ own website, a filer can receive a check up to $6,143 when they have “three or more qualifying children.”

When asked whether the tax credit program was only eligible to illegal immigrants who has previously filed tax returns, Koskinen conceded that those who haven’t filed before could still be eligible for back-credits.

“It turns out there was a lack of clarity about that,” Koskinen said. “If you get a social security number, you can then file for this year if you’re working and if you earned income in the 3 years you were working before that and filed you’ll be eligible.”

“If you did not file, you’ll have to file a return and you’ll have to file to demonstrate with the same information anybody else would that you actually earned income and were therefore eligible. That’s on the assumption that you would get the earned income tax credit automatically whether you were working or not.”

“I knew you were going to bring something negative up,” Gutierrez whined during the press conference. “It doesn’t matter what I say. You will turn it against all of us here at this caucus. You know it.”

Koskinen also said Wednesday that the White House never asked him or any other IRS official about the tax impact of Obama’s executive action on immigration.

President Obama’s temporary deportation amnesty will make it easier for illegal immigrants to improperly register and vote in elections, state elections officials testified toCongress on Thursday, saying that the driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers they will be granted create a major voting loophole.

While stressing that it remains illegal for noncitizens to vote, secretaries of state from Ohio and Kansas said they won’t have the tools to sniff out illegal immigrants who register anyway, ignoring stiff penalties to fill out the registration forms that are easily available at shopping malls, motor vehicle bureaus and in curbside registration drives.

Anyone registering to vote attests that he or she is a citizen, but Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted said mass registration drives often aren’t able to give due attention to that part, and so illegal immigrants will still get through.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach said even some motor vehicle bureau workers automatically ask customers if they want to register to vote, which some noncitizens in the past have cited as their reason for breaking the law to register.

“It’s a guarantee it will happen,” Mr. Kobach said.

Democrats disputed that it was an issue at all, saying Mr. Obama’s new policy, which could apply to more than 4 million illegal immigrants, doesn’t change anything in state or federal law.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting member of Congress, accused Republicans of an effort at voter suppression.

“The president’s executive order gives immigrants the right to stay — immigrants who have been here for years, immigrants who have been working hard and whose labor we have needed,” Ms. Norton said. “The Republicans may want to go down in history as the party who tried once again 100 years later to nullify the right to vote. Well, I am here to say they shall not succeed.”

Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Democrat, said he doubted illegal immigrants would risk running afoul of the law — which could get them deported — just to be an insignificant part of an election.

The hearing was the latest GOP effort to dent Mr. Obama’s executive action, announced in November, which grants tentative legal status and work permits to as many as 4 million illegal immigrant parents whose children are either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. The president also expanded a 2012 policy for so-called Dreamers, or illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, granting them tentative legal status and work permits as well.

Republicans say there are a host of unintended consequences, including the chances of illegal voting, a perverse incentive created by Obamacare that would make newly legalized workers more attractive to some businesses than American workers and complications with the tax code.

As the preceding article showed.

So, what it my stance on granting American “Rights” to illegal aliens?

Allow me to break it down for tou…slowly, in case any Liberals are reading this.

Let’s pretend I broke into your house. When you discover me there, you insist I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about this whole “Path to Citizenship” business, can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I’m in Management. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3. Legal Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children. We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight. But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish. But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time. Secure our borders. Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws. And if the Federal Government won’t, the states, like Arizona, will have to pass their own laws. America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

Do you remember when you were a child, and your parents told you to pick your friends carefully because you are judged by the company that you keep?

Evidently, Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. never took young Barry aside and gave him that bit of advice.

Look at Barack Hussein Obama’s career, from his days as a community organizer to now, and look at the company he kept and is keeping.

Back in his days of community organizing, Obama hung out with the movers and shakers of Chicago politics, professional politicians who are known for their shady backroom dealing.

Then, he worked at the Annenberg Foundation with Former Weatherman, Bomber Bill Ayers

When he got into the Illinois Senate, he continued these relationships, and built new ones with fellow travelers. That is, politicians who thought the same way that he did and who never saw a situation that they could not take advantage of.

Then, when he came to the United States Senate, he and his handlers made sure that he was around the right sort of people who could further his political career. Of course, this took the seat of importance away from those whom he was supposed to be representing from his home district.

After his election to the highest office in this land, Obama has made poor choice after poor choice , in terms of whom to embrace as a friend among four and leadership, and whom to alienate.

As I have said many times, Obama alienates our friends and embraces our enemies.

There is a reason that the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, always advised to

Trust, but verify.

Reagan knew that in the game of world politics, those who wish to harm us, are masters at being duplicitous.

Our enemies will lie to us at every opportunity to gain an advantage over us, because they fear the kind of American Will and Courage, which freed the world in World War II.

Ronaldus Magnus’ warning continues to echo as loud as it ever did, some 30+ years later.

However, the individual who now sits behind the desk in the Oval Office, refuses to verify the intentions of those whmo he remains so steadfast in attempting to befriend.

The Obama administration on Wednesday paid $490 million in cash assets to Iran and will have released a total of $11.9 billion to the Islamic Republic by the time nuclear talks are scheduled to end in June, according to figures provided by the State Department.

Today’s $490 million release, the third such payment of this amount since Dec. 10, was agreed to by the Obama administration under the parameters of another extension in negotiations over Tehran’s contested nuclear program that was inked in November.

Iran will receive a total of $4.9 billion in unfrozen cash assets via 10 separate payments by the United States through June 22, when talks with Iran are scheduled to end with a final agreement aimed at curbing the country’s nuclear work, according to a State Department official.

Iran received $4.2 billion in similar payments under the 2013 interim agreement with the United States and was then given another $2.8 billion by the Obama administration last year in a bid to keep Iran committed to the talks through November, when negotiators parted ways without reaching an agreement.

Iran will have received a total of $11.9 billion in cash assets by the end of June if current releases continue on pace as scheduled.

The release of this money has drawn outrage from some Republican lawmakers who filed legislationlast year to prevent the release of cash due to a lack of restrictions on how Iran can spend the money.

These cash payments by the United States have been made with no strings attached, prompting concerns that Iran could use the funds to finance its worldwide terror operations, which include the financial backing of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other rogue entities.

Senators—including Mark Kirk (R., Ill.), Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), and John Cornyn (R., Texas)—sought last year to put a hold on the cash infusions until the White House could certify that Iran was not using the money to support terrorism.

Kirk, who is preparing to offer legislation that would tighten sanctions on Iran, said that the ongoing payments could help Iran fuel its terror empire well into the near future.

“Between November 2014 and July 2015, the interim deal’s direct forms of sanctions relief will allow Iran access to roughly $4.9 billion in frozen money,” Kirk told the Washington Free Beacon “That’s equal to what it’d cost Iran to fund Hezbollah for as much as 50 years.”

The Pentagon estimates Iran has spent $100 to $200 million per year funding Hezbollah.

Well, now we know why Obama is so upset that Benjamin Netanyahu is coming to speak to the US Congress.

You see, Netanyahu is an expert on the Islamic nation of Iran. He also has a very fine intelligence network, which no doubt has kept him up-to-date concerning the intricate workings of the deal-making that is going on, on Obama’s behalf, between Secretary of State John Kerry and the Barbaric Islamic Mullahs of Iran.

Obama is scared to death that Netanyahu will reveal to the American Public that Obama’s naive arrogance and duplicitous Chicago-Style Backroom “Negotiations” with his “Muslim Brothers” in Iran, are not only allowing them to surreptitiously build a “nuclear device”, but the dhimmi at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is paying for our possible annihilation WITH AMERICAN TAXPAYER MONEY!

Now, I’m just spitballin’ here, but, I wonder if his meddling in the Israeli Elections, in order to kick Netanyahu out of office, as I wrote about yesterday, is a codicil of his “negotiations” with the Mad Mullahs?